Architecture and Public Policy

Related Topics

CIS explores how changes in the architecture of computer networks affect the economic environment for innovation and competition on the Internet, and how the law should react to those changes. This work has lead us to analyze the issue of network neutrality, perhaps the Internet's most debated policy issue, which concerns Internet user's ability to access the content and software of their choice without interference from network providers.

Ademir splits his time between two worlds. He is part-time is in academia, currently taking a PhD at University of Sao Paulo. His research focuses on efforts by Latin American regulators to promote increased access to broadband Internet and implement a network neutrality regime. He has been particularly interested in the debate involving the regulation of network neutrality in Brazil and the US, and has submitted contributions to the Brazilian Ministry of Justice and to the US Federal Communications Commission.

Richard Salgado serves as Google's Director for information security and law enforcement matters. Prior to joining Google, Richard was with Yahoo!, focusing on international security and compliance work. He also served as senior counsel in the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section of the United States Department of Justice. As a federal prosecutor, Richard specialized in investigating and prosecuting computer network cases, such as computer hacking, illegal computer wiretaps, denial of service attacks, malicious code, and other technology-driven privacy crimes.

Brendan Sasso is the Open Internet Fellow at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society. In his previous career as a journalist, he covered the Federal Communications Commission as it wrote landmark net neutrality regulations in 2015. He also wrote about issues including consumer privacy, government surveillance, cybersecurity, and intellectual property. He worked for The Hill and National Journal, and his work has also appeared in The Atlantic, Quartz, and DefenseOne. He has appeared on C-SPAN, MSNBC, Fox News, and NPR to discuss current technology policy issues.

Ben Scott is a Visiting Fellow at the Stiftung Neue Verantwortung in Berlin and Senior Adviser to the Open Technology Institute at the New America Foundation in Washington DC. Previously, he was Policy Advisor for Innovation at the US Department of State, where he worked at the intersection of technology and foreign policy. In a small team of advisors to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, he helped to steward the 21st Century Statecraft agenda with a focus on technology policy, social media and development.

Pages

The essay below serves as introduction to the Stanford Center for Internet and Society's Law, Borders, and Speech Conference Proceedings Volume. The conference brought together experts from around the world to discuss conflicting national laws governing online speech -- and how courts, Internet platforms, and public interest advocates should respond to increasing demands for these laws to be enforced on the global Internet.

Today, someone asked me about the Internet and human well-being over the next decade. The question was a healthy provocation to look at the big picture. I chose “more helped than harmed” from the very short list of radio-button responses. Here’s my elaboration:

Today the FCC Commissioners voted 3-2 to eliminate longstanding net neutrality protections, reclassify internet service providers as ‘information services’ under Title I of the Communications Act, and ban states from enacting their own net neutrality protections.

Network neutrality prevents broadband Internet service providers from micromanaging our lives online. Constraining the networks this way enables and even empowers Internet users to be active and productive human beings rather than passive consumers. Unfortunately, the network neutrality debate is so polarized that neither side sees the full picture.

Pages

The FCC is poised to rescind the Open Internet Order—the set of strong, enforceable net neutrality rules that prohibit internet service providers (ISPs) from interfering with web traffic that travels across their networks. One unintentional victim of that action is likely to be small television stations, newspaper publishers, and websites devoted to local news. Local news outlets play a vital civic role, but they face a crisis of declining revenue and audience, largely driven by internet competition.

On Wednesday November 22, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai published his draft order outlining his plan to undo the net neutrality protections that have been in place in the U.S. since the beginning of the Internet. His proposal would leave both the FCC and the states powerless to protect consumers and businesses against net neutrality violations by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon that connect us to the Internet.

Earlier this week Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai announced a radical plan to undo the net neutrality protections that have been in place in the U.S. since the beginning of the Internet.

Pages

Comcast Corp. v. FCC is a 2010 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia case holding that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have ancillary jurisdiction over Comcast’s Internet service under the language of the Communications Act of 1934. In so holding, the Court vacated a 2008 order issued by the FCC that asserted jurisdiction over Comcast’s network management polices and censured Comcast from interfering with its subscribers' use of peer-to-peer software.

In 2005, on the same day the FCC re-classified DSL service and effectively reduced the regulatory obligations of DSL providers, the FCC announced its unanimous view that consumers are entitled to certain rights and expectations with respect to their broadband service, including the right to:

"The upcoming letter will be another show of unity for the industry, said Andrew Bridges, a lawyer at Fenwick & West who is not involved in the drafting of the letter but has worked with many of the same companies on unrelated matters. "My fear is that the ban, both literally and secondarily as a reflection of broader policies, is going to threaten the American economy in the most fundamental way," Bridges said, adding that given Trump's recent proposals, "Why would any global company want to have its headquarters in the U.S.?""

"But standing up to a president also carries risks, especially for publicly traded companies, which face a legal obligation to put profit ahead of protest. “For companies that are acting in their self-interest, the process is sitting down and looking at this matrix, and trying to figure out how to be effective,” says Andrew McLaughlin, a venture partner at Betaworks and deputy chief technology officer of the United States under President Obama."

""During his tenure, despite industry roots, Wheeler proved to be a leader who heeded democracy's call," said Malkia Cyril, executive director at the Center for Media Justice. "Wheeler was a chairman willing to act in defense of the public interest, and in defiance of industry pressure and partisan politics."

"Earlier this year, Stanford Law Professor Barbara van Schewick wrote a report examining T-Mobile’s Binge On zero-rated program, which offers “unlimited” streaming of content from certain providers, like Netflix, Hulu and HBO.

In the report, van Schewick concluded that despite T-Mobile’s assurances that Binge On is open to any legal streaming provider at no cost, significant technical barriers to entry still work to discriminate against smaller streaming services.

Cultural Events Board is proud to announce that Valarie Kaur will be the first out-of-state Sikh American to come speak to our campus regarding hate crimes against Sikh and Muslim American following 9/11.

From the First Amendment to Net Neutrality. How Media Regulation Affects What We Say

Does the FCC's recent ruling on net neutrality promise more equal media access? Or will it lead to years of divisive litigation? FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn will discuss implications of the new rules and the role of media regulation in creating a free press; Victor Pickard of the University of Pennsylvania will look at how media regulation choices in the 1940s affect us today; Stanford's Morgan Weiland will explain what the proposed federal shield law means for journalists.

"The Federal Communications Commission is faced with a crucial decision on open access to the Internet. A survey shows 80 percent of Americans want the FCC to prohibit providers from giving enhanced access to customers that pay more. Now the President agrees. But providers — like Time Warner Cable, Verizon and AT&T — say that will discourage innovations and investments that improve service for everyone. As the pressure rises for FCC action, will there be toll lanes on the information super highway."

Prof. Barbara van Schewick participated in the FCC's Open Internet Roundtable on September 16, 2014.

The internet roundtable series provides an opportunity for the Commission staff and interested parties to further examine the actions the Commission should take for its goal of determining the best approach to protecting and promoting Internet openness. This roundtable focused on Policy Approaches to Ensure an Open Internet, specifically, Tailoring Policy to Harms.